header-logo header-logo

07 October 2016
Issue: 7717 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Libel & slander

Lokhova v Longmuir [2016] EWHC 1977 (QB), [2016] All ER (D) 201 (Jul)

 

The Queen’s Bench Division allowed the defendant’s appeal against the master’s decision, rescinding her direction releasing to a judge the claimant’s application to amend her particulars of claim in libel proceedings. The application should more properly be heard by a puisne judge, as the legal issues raised upon the application were of importance, were not straightforward and the master’s decision had not fully grappled with the likely complexities.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

DWF—11 appointments

DWF—11 appointments

DWF strengthens North West teams with 11 newly qualified solicitors

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll